Menu

Sunday, December 06, 2009

Nazi ideology has been the subject of countless history and sociology (not to mention psychiatry) books over the last 60 years, and is as difficult to understand now as it was then. Nazi ideology - what is not the same as that of Fascism, its Italian cousin - incorporated a lot of ideas, but it was not only an anti-Semitic programme.

The Nazis sought to complete re-form society in every aspect, from health to the environment to religion. One of their ideological bases was a kind of nativism, which ultimately led them to isolate Jews - but also Slavs - as interlopers and parasites in the Authentic Germany.

Hitler himself was a fan of the author Karl May, who idealised Native Americans as "Authentic" humans because of their natural symbiosis with the land and the environment. For the Nazis, authentic humanity involved the co-operation of all true Germans, the environment and, of course, the State, in an organic whole.

Most importantly, the Nazis saw themselves - as Aryans - as the true "Native Europeans", with Jews, Slavs, Gypsies and even Romans and Christians as colonisers. They worshipped Wagnerian ideas of pre-Christian purity, and part of reinforcing the ideology of Pure Germanness was to remove all traces of the impurities from their midst.

Those who allow South Africa's rulers the freedom to promote the validity of racial quotas are setting themselves up for a disaster. That is not to say the ANC are Nazis, but that there is a slippery slope when it comes to identifying some as 'natives' and others as 'outsiders'. How many people have you come across who suggest that whites have no business being in Africa? Does the same argument apply to Indians? probably.

The same ideology peddled by the Nazis is being re-hashed in South Africa in the form of African Nationalism. When the ANC claims that white farmers have "stolen" the land from the natives, they promote the hatred of those farmers as people who don't belong. The land of South Africa is no more owned by farmers than in any other country; the issue in South Africa is that they are a different colour.

So-called Progressive policies designed to "reverse" racism, such as AA and BEE, are really just dressed-up racial essentialism from the 1930s. Those who deny the very existence of race are the first to propose that race should be a consideration in hiring and promotion. Those of us who argue for race-neutrality are accused of being part of the problem.

The assumption behind AA and BEE is that white employers are ipso facto racists, who are incapable or unwilling to look beyond colour when it comes to employment.

The is in spite of the fact that whites voted overwhelmingly to give the New South Africa a fighting chance.

AA says whites are racist, and will not change unless we are forced to do so. All of which fits nicely into the scheme of things drawn up by multiculturalists in the rest of the world.

5
Opinion(s):

Every single human being upon this planet is a racist. So what. That is the fucking TRUTH and you KNOW it but just won't ADMIT it, innit? But I'll forgive you because you're just a kid. To associate Hitler with Zuma is an insult to the Nazis. The Waffen SS were the greatest army of warriors the human race has ever known or produced. Be proud of it. Chances are you have their genes, or spin-offs at least, Mister "Viking". Wake the fuck up. It's all about surviival of the fittest. So what, we may be on the downside right now, but it doesn't mean to say we've lost - innit?

The post is not intended to accuse the ANC of being Nazis - although you'll notice from part 1 that the author raises the comparison, which in any case has been made before - but to make the point that certain ways of thinking have certain consequences.If the ANC show no flexibility when it comes to whites, where will it lead?